click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)
to know that his problems were going to come from john mccain, ted cruz, lindsey graham, and a couple of the other republican conservatives. it just seemed to go completely off track. not the confirmation, but the performance. >> well, here's what happened. he was bad. i mean, there's no other kind of way to put it. these things -- these public kwurmation hearings are at least part performance, andrea, and i would argue they're mostly performance, and you are right. he just seemed sort of ill equipped to manage it. only thing i could think of was this. strategically speaking. chuck hagel and his people decided going into this that, yes, he had a few issues, but they had already sort of been publicly litigated and had proven to be not disqualifying. that is, he had got tony this point. therefore, he should just take sort of a passive stance, let ted cruz, let john mccain, let them lecture him sort of be apologetic and say i did the best i that i could, but not go on the attack, not be aggressive, be under the theory that if nothing else came out that ultimately the republican senators
mccain. we've talked about john mccain and chuck hagel. once very close friends. mccain during the chuck hagel confirmation hearing was one of the most poignant, maybe ted cruise was the most poignant, but one of the most pointed critics of haling. mccain not putting his name to that letter. it's -- this seems like a foregone conclusion here in that this is much more for the public record and for history's sake why this letter was sent. >> and one more thing. before we leave, hagel, is this whole stir yesterday where. >> did you take money from the friends of hamas? >> it's lake-effect like this was a star claim we are bsh it got some legs, and it was all about theater. when you had all those senators, you know, people like cruise questioning him, talking about the friends of hamas, i mean, they were out for blood when it came to hagel and how to make a design in some ways. >> without even checking factual basis for their questions. >> no. >> you can ask anything and create a soundbyte, and people pick it up in social media, and it's off and running. >> there was some degree of
you have senator john mccain scolding you, when senator john mccain has been one person who has been after chuck hagel on his own, then you know you have gone too far. rubio was flawless last week. he took a mistake, which looked like the mistake of a water bottle, and turned it into a plus, like few politicians have ever done. maybe like bill clinton we went on, i think, one of the late night talk shows to make fun of johnny carson. john where i carson. s thank you. >> well, rubio so far has just about done everything right, and if one of the big players in the emgregs debate, working with the other side, and has shown that aside from that state of the union response, he picks himself up and moves right on and is making his foreign trip. thank you very much. margaret, good to see you. chris, of course, our daily fix. connecticut lawmakers, meanwhile, are moving very swiftly on new laws at the state level to combat gun violence inspect response to the newtown massacre. vice president biden was there yesterday to urge them on. >> the reflection of what the standing assumption is in am
and john mccain are going to the white house. they're going to have a meeting with the president on immigration, but during the gaggle, the free-flowing with the pool, the back and forth between the white house press secretary and the traveling press corps, they did say sequester would likely come up in that conversation between mccain, graham, and the president. any chance that those three could strike a deal? >> i can't -- sorry. >> i will say very quickly, i don't see how even if they did how we would avert the sequester on friday, chuck. congress doesn't work like that. this seems to be at least the possible opening engagement of the talks of a deal. i mean, that's the amazing thing about sequester. >> we can't even schedule talks. >> negotiations have broken down. no, negotiations never began. having them break down would actually be a step in the right direction. >> swraent even had -- >> we have seen this movie before where what will happen in the final day or two as they come to some agreement not on any kind of a deal in terms of addressing the underlying issue, but mere
some of the things that john mccain has been pushing hard. doesn't the united states have to do more? >> i think the answer is yes. i mean, it's clear that there are risks in acting, but i think we have to take a look at what are the risks and costs of not acting. and i think we have to keep in mind the kind of red lines that the president has established in the use of chemical weapons or the israelis have established in terms of -- >> just look at what they've acknowledged in munich that they were involved in that strike which everyone sort of knew, but interesting that he would say so. >> and what it highlights is things are going to happen. you'd rather put us in a position that rather than being driven to do something, we're in a position to try to effect the landscape more and we don't wait to be in a position where we have to react, but we're in a position where we try to influence more what the shape of the landscape is going to be. >> finally, as we look forward to john when in anbrennan's con hearing, how much blow back is in the united states because of the drone attacks an
need to attend, of course, the syrian civil war. further calls over the weekend by senator john mccain that the administration should do more to arm the rebels and help the rebels, and other people, of course -- from the munich security conference that was held over this past weekend, and then, of course, you have the news from iran that appears to be accepting the invitation to engage in talks with the united states and the other permanent members of the security council. there's a very big, very tough agenda ahead of this new swuf state. >> and, in fact, there was some reporting over the weekend that hillary clinton had tried to move the white house to be more aggressive on syria on arming the rebels, and that john kerry is actually more in sync with mccain on that and with a more aggressive posture of leadership for the u.s. on syria. >> well, i think the administration is going to have to ask itself whether its present policy can work because assad is just strong enough to survive, and the rebels are not strong enough to win this battalions, and more than 60,000 people, many of the
john mccain, kelly, who is a critic of hagel's to come back to his defense against this freshman senator from texas who is raising the suggestion that he had taken money even from pyongyang or from iran. >> well, what's interesting about mccain's position here is that he has said very clearly that he does not believe that chuck hagel was the right choice in this instance. he believes his performance at his hearing was poor. he took real issue with his fellow republican ted cruz of texas and said that chuck hagel is an honorable man and wanted to defend him in this process. where it gets harder for mccain is that lindsey graham is perhaps his greatest ally in the senate, and he believes that there are legitimate questions about benghazi still to be answered. not so much looking at the past, although politically that's what they want to do. also trying to make sure that they understand what's going on with some of these issues as they may pertain to future hot spots. mccain is not jumping to the ted cruz bandwagon, but i would surmise that he wants to be protective of lindsey graha
not know how to respond to john mccain and other critics. at the same time a lot of people are suggesting that ted cruise's attack on him and this continual, you know, lindsey graham now saying let's take a look at the rutgers speech and now they're demanding five years of back finances, not two years, which is a new standard as carl -- >> i think to be clear, i think the standard that lindsay graham and others are doing for finances for the secretary of defense is not one that their party's nominee for the white house to be commander in chief could or would have met just a few months ago when he was running for the presidency. remember, mitt romney's big excuse on giving us more information on kaymen investments is i filled out all that is required in the financial disclosure forms. now lindsay graham wants i think every private thought that chuck hagel has ever ever had and every public word that he has ever uttered. look, i think it is shameful what he is having to go through on that side of this. they're not questions that are holding this up based on what his thoughts are on iraq or
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)